About your Search

20130201
20130209
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the cia. john brennan, the architect of the obama administration's drone program, strongly defended their use, saying strikes only take place to prevent terror threats, not as punishment for them. >> i think there is a misimpression on the part of some american people who believe that we take strikes to punish terrorists for past transgressions. nothing could be further from the truth. we only take such actions as a last resort to save lives when there's no other alternative to taking an action that's going to mitigate that threat. >> democratic senator ron wyden who has demanded more insight into the administration's legal justification for drone strikes against americans pressed brennan on the issue. >> do you believe that the president should provide an individual american with the opportunity to surrender before killing them? >> any american who joins al qaeda will know full well that they have joined an organization that is at war with the united states and has killed thousands upon thousands of individuals, many, many of them who were americans. so i think any american who did
to be the next head of the cia. and andrea mitchell, i wonder if this could, in any way, get in the way of brennan again. >> well, this is so much in a state of flux right now. clearly, i mean, the president's called to senator wyden last night, so unusual to try to reassure him and try to ward off what could be a calamitous hearing today. the fact is that brennan was already going to be asked about enhanced interrogation techniques. john mccain has raised those issues. but in terms of the democratic group and actually susan collins was one of those as well, the 11 senators led by john wyden and three of them are on the committee including wyden and susan collins, and they were pushing for the release of this. and then mike rogers on our air yesterday, the house intelligence chair not in the confirmation process, but he lent his voice. senator feinstein was obviously working behind the scenes. and so finally last night around 6:30, 7:00 last night, the white house relented and the president called wyden. i know you guys are going to talk to wyden later. but this is a very big deal becau
debate as opposed to payments by the cia in anbar province. there's a big debate about what actually made a difference. and hagel was saying, look, even if this thing made things better tactically, strategically, it still didn't make sense because the larger thrust of the war didn't make sense. you understand why he was resisting answering that. we can argue about whether it was the best way politically, but substantively, it was an impossible question to answer. >> donny, he should have been more confident in why he was resisting to answer that because as richard pointed out, there's a clear discussion about that. >> it's very easy to say a bad performance, that was serious what happened yesterday. there was a level of incompetency across the board, whether it was preparation, whether it was demeanor, whether it was just understanding of facts and policy, and like i said earlier, i'm going to liken it to a job interview. if you go on an interview like that and you perform, you don't get the job. i think this is such a critical appointment. you have to look at that -- >> should he not get
happen to have a known terrorist on the cia's department watch list in your living room, perhaps you have some issues, too. don't get me wrong. >> no, you don't, harold. did you go to law school? if you're an american, are you telling me if you're an american overseas and you happen to stumble into the wrong zip code, you could be killed because somebody is sitting in the living room of a guy who is a terrorist? >> i've never had one in my living room. >> but you may not know the guy is a terrorist. maybe you know him from the mosque you're going to. maybe you're the only two americans. i don't know how to play this. >> all these questions have to be answered. >> just because you're in the same proximity with a suspected terrorist, who has not been charged with any crimes, then you may be killed. >> call me old-fashioned, i like checks and balances on the executive branch, even during war. >> i agree with you. the senate should ask these questions, i don't disagree with that. >> here's my question. i get the hip poxcracy of it or disconnect previous administrations have received and this
." and yet we insisted on ignoring them. george tenet was the cia head at the time. he said, my hair is on fire in july of that year. i went down to see the fbi about something else. they said, you ought to take a look at terrorism. we just blithely kept going and then it blew up in our face. this is an opportunity, it seems to me, to take the immigration example of people in the house and in the senate to cross party lines and say, let's begin by doing something about medicare. we know -- we all know we have to do something about that. let's begin by doing something about tax reform. they have moved on immigration, which is an encouraging sign, but it's less than the sum of the parts at this moment in terms of how they want to take a kind of whole approach to what we're going to have to do. and there's going to have to be some people from the ground up in the house and the senate who are going to seize this and say, i don't want this on my record. i'm serving in congress. i'm serving in the senate. and when i go out of here, historians are going to look back and say that we complete
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)